[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <063D6719AE5E284EB5DD2968C1650D6DB0107FEB@AcuExch.aculab.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2016 13:35:52 +0000
From: David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
To: 'Vlastimil Babka' <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC: Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
Michal Hocko <mhocko@...nel.org>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux API <linux-api@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-man@...r.kernel.org" <linux-man@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v2] fs/select: add vmalloc fallback for select(2)
From: Vlastimil Babka
> Sent: 23 September 2016 10:59
...
> > I suspect that fdt->max_fds is an upper bound for the highest fd the
> > process has open - not the RLIMIT_NOFILE value.
>
> I gathered that the highest fd effectively limits the number of files,
> so it's the same. I might be wrong.
An application can reduce RLIMIT_NOFILE below that of an open file.
David
Powered by blists - more mailing lists